Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Discussion Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

    The lynchpin of the resurrection argument is that, had Jesus not risen from the dead, anyone could simply have produced his body and Christianity would never have begun.


    How does that work, given what can be shown from the, also Christian, movement of creationism?


    If you take a typical creationist assertion such as:
    "Evolutionary theory describes humans as evolving from monkeys."
    anyone with a basic grasp of how to use the internet can fact check that in less time than it takes to boil a kettle full of water, and discover that it is false, and that the correct assertion is:
    "Evolutionary theory describes humans and monkeys as evolving from a common ancestor."


    Straightforward and easy. However, it does not matter how often this is pointed out to Christians of a creationist disposition. The popularity of the falsehood continues unabated, and even appears to be growing.


    Am I supposed to believe that any of the following would have prevented Christians who were convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven from continuing to do so? If so, in what way?


    "I don't know where this story of blood and water comes from. I broke the legs of all three of the people we crucified and then I threw the bodies into Gehenna, as I do every time."


    "I haven't even got a garden tomb, and if I had, much as I admired that rabbi called Jesus, I would not have given it to him."


    "Well, it's not in a very good state now that the ferral dogs have been at it, but that corpse just over there to the left is definitely Jesus of Nazareth. He doesn't look very alive to me."

  • #2
    Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

    I'm a Creationist and I don't believe that evolution teaches that people came from monkeys. So yes, sometimes Christians AND non-believers included, [you left them out] believe that evolution teaches that people came from monkeys. What that has to do with the resurrection, I'm not sure and forgive me for not understanding your question.

    People know only what they have learned. From complex/scholarly study and unfortunately, from skimming the surface and only believing what others say.

    Most people, Christian or not, who have not done a scholarly study of evolution only believe what they see or are told. Which is most of the time this:

    consequences-of-evolution-631 (1).jpg

    So the average person, Christian or not, believes that evolution teaches that man came from monkeys.
    sigpic
    ".....it's your nickel"

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

      Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
      The lynchpin of the resurrection argument is that, had Jesus not risen from the dead, anyone could simply have produced his body and Christianity would never have begun.


      How does that work, given what can be shown from the, also Christian, movement of creationism?


      If you take a typical creationist assertion such as:
      "Evolutionary theory describes humans as evolving from monkeys."
      anyone with a basic grasp of how to use the internet can fact check that in less time than it takes to boil a kettle full of water, and discover that it is false, and that the correct assertion is:
      "Evolutionary theory describes humans and monkeys as evolving from a common ancestor."


      Straightforward and easy. However, it does not matter how often this is pointed out to Christians of a creationist disposition. The popularity of the falsehood continues unabated, and even appears to be growing.


      Am I supposed to believe that any of the following would have prevented Christians who were convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven from continuing to do so? If so, in what way?


      "I don't know where this story of blood and water comes from. I broke the legs of all three of the people we crucified and then I threw the bodies into Gehenna, as I do every time."


      "I haven't even got a garden tomb, and if I had, much as I admired that rabbi called Jesus, I would not have given it to him."


      "Well, it's not in a very good state now that the ferral dogs have been at it, but that corpse just over there to the left is definitely Jesus of Nazareth. He doesn't look very alive to me."
      David, what Christian writers do you read? Whose books?

      In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

      Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

      If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

        Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
        The lynchpin of the resurrection argument is that, had Jesus not risen from the dead, anyone could simply have produced his body and Christianity would never have begun.
        Those with political authority and religious authority certainly would have produced his body in order to silence them. Perhaps they offered a reward for information leading to whereabouts of his body....but nobody came forward.


        Those who did believe were persecuted, some to death, all the days of their life and not one of them cracked under the pressure.
        If they were telling lies regarding his resurrection, then one would expect them to abandon their scam at the first sign of trouble.

        conclusion = He is risen
        And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

          Originally posted by jeffweeder View Post
          Those with political authority and religious authority certainly would have produced his body in order to silence them. Perhaps they offered a reward for information leading to whereabouts of his body....but nobody came forward.


          Those who did believe were persecuted, some to death, all the days of their life and not one of them cracked under the pressure.
          If they were telling lies regarding his resurrection, then one would expect them to abandon their scam at the first sign of trouble.

          conclusion = He is risen
          David
          As Jeff said above, something incredible (the resurrection), effected his disciples and followers to all become persecutued and martyred for their belief in His resurrection.

          Remember just a few days prior, all his disciples and followers fled, hid, and denied him when he was arrested.

          But this was before the resurrection.

          If their insufficient trust, belief, or fortitude kept them from remaining with him and sacrifice themselves at his arrest and crucifixion....

          ....why would they all a few years later, be willing to do so?

          Only the life-changing event of resurrection would explain all their changes in faith.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

            Originally posted by David Taylor View Post
            David
            As Jeff said above, something incredible (the resurrection), effected his disciples and followers to all become persecutued and martyred for their belief in His resurrection.

            Remember just a few days prior, all his disciples and followers fled, hid, and denied him when he was arrested.

            But this was before the resurrection.

            If their insufficient trust, belief, or fortitude kept them from remaining with him and sacrifice themselves at his arrest and crucifixion....

            ....why would they all a few years later, be willing to do so?

            Only the life-changing event of resurrection would explain all their changes in faith.
            Beautifully written.
            And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

              The 'from monkeys' assertion is merely one of many. The creationists I have met over the years all seem to have one feature in common, with the exception of those who say 'It is of no consequence what the evidence is, because it is in the Bible', a view I have only encountered twice. That is that when asked 'Have you ever even attempted to find out what an evolutionary biologist has to say in response to your argument?' the answer in invariably, 'No, I have no interest in that'.

              This concerns beliefs it is possible to fact check in minutes if you live in the industrialised democracies of the world.

              It would take more effort to track down a centurion and ask 'Did you break the legs of all three of those men crucified about fifty days ago?' or to hunt through a pile of decomposing, possibly smouldering, bodies in order to find the one that someone vouches to be Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose someone had, what interest would someone high on the notion that he was still alive have had in the news obtained?

              Remember that the first, alleged, martyr to the Christian faith was a convert who had never even met Jesus when he had been alive. When it comes to dying for an idea, there is a lot more enthusiasm in religious circles than there is towards critically examining it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
                The lynchpin of the resurrection argument is that, had Jesus not risen from the dead, anyone could simply have produced his body and Christianity would never have begun.


                How does that work, given what can be shown from the, also Christian, movement of creationism?


                If you take a typical creationist assertion such as:
                "Evolutionary theory describes humans as evolving from monkeys."
                anyone with a basic grasp of how to use the internet can fact check that in less time than it takes to boil a kettle full of water, and discover that it is false, and that the correct assertion is:
                "Evolutionary theory describes humans and monkeys as evolving from a common ancestor."


                Straightforward and easy. However, it does not matter how often this is pointed out to Christians of a creationist disposition. The popularity of the falsehood continues unabated, and even appears to be growing.


                Am I supposed to believe that any of the following would have prevented Christians who were convinced that Jesus had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven from continuing to do so? If so, in what way?


                "I don't know where this story of blood and water comes from. I broke the legs of all three of the people we crucified and then I threw the bodies into Gehenna, as I do every time."


                "I haven't even got a garden tomb, and if I had, much as I admired that rabbi called Jesus, I would not have given it to him."


                "Well, it's not in a very good state now that the ferral dogs have been at it, but that corpse just over there to the left is definitely Jesus of Nazareth. He doesn't look very alive to me."
                You make a very good argument based on an appeal to nothing in particular, if I'm honest with you.

                Yes, some people say "humans evolved from monkeys" when the theory is more about the two evolving from a common ancestor. But what of it? The fact some members of a group are wrong about one issue doesn't mean all members of the group are wrong about that issue, or that all members of the group are wrong about any other issue.

                With regard to the resurrection. If the resurrection didn't happen there were people out there who would have quick to produce the body. The Pharisees, for example, would have been very pleased to produce the corpse of the man who had bothered them so much. Hey guys, this Jesus dude you were following is dead, might as well forget about him and what he taught. The real kicker comes from the people who said Jesus appeared to them and they saw him ascend into heaven. I mean, you know, it all makes for a pretty good prank, right? Your beloved leader is dead and rotting in a garbage heap and it just helps keep focus on yourselves if you claim he's not dead at all and just hope nobody pulls a body out of the garbage heap and says "Oh, you mean this guy here?" The guy is dead and gone but you just don't want to admit you backed the wrong horse, so you weave a bizarre sounding tale of resurrection and all that. But then comes the torture as people try and get you to deny it. If you'd just made it all up, or you were pulling some kind of prank that got out of hand, don't you think you'd bend under torture? You know, it was a good joke and all that but when you're about to get thrown in jail for it maybe that's a good time to admit that your beloved leader didn't actually rise again.

                Would you play a prank on someone? I would, if circumstances were right. Would you face jail, torture, exile, execution rather than admit your prank was, well, a prank? I don't know many people who would take it that far. Maybe the disciples were onto something after all.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                  Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
                  The 'from monkeys' assertion is merely one of many. The creationists I have met over the years all seem to have one feature in common, with the exception of those who say 'It is of no consequence what the evidence is, because it is in the Bible', a view I have only encountered twice. That is that when asked 'Have you ever even attempted to find out what an evolutionary biologist has to say in response to your argument?' the answer in invariably, 'No, I have no interest in that'.

                  This concerns beliefs it is possible to fact check in minutes if you live in the industrialised democracies of the world.

                  It would take more effort to track down a centurion and ask 'Did you break the legs of all three of those men crucified about fifty days ago?' or to hunt through a pile of decomposing, possibly smouldering, bodies in order to find the one that someone vouches to be Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose someone had, what interest would someone high on the notion that he was still alive have had in the news obtained?

                  Remember that the first, alleged, martyr to the Christian faith was a convert who had never even met Jesus when he had been alive. When it comes to dying for an idea, there is a lot more enthusiasm in religious circles than there is towards critically examining it.
                  The second recorded marytr walked with Jesus throughout his earthly ministry. So if he was a lie, he knew it.

                  You are correct that many religious people die for religion with some enthusiasm. Muslims are a great example.

                  But who does for a lie? If I concocted a story with some buddies and the results were persecution and beatings, lack of riches and death, I’m spilling the beans. Who wouldn’t? And if one would be that crazy to endure all that, would 9 other buddies who knew it was a lie do the same?

                  In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

                  Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

                  If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                    Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
                    Remember that the first, alleged, martyr to the Christian faith was a convert who had never even met Jesus when he had been alive. When it comes to dying for an idea, there is a lot more enthusiasm in religious circles than there is towards critically examining it.
                    If you're talking about the people who parrot what the Bible says regardless of whether the Bible says what they say it says the chances are you will find people who talk a good game about being willing to die for the sake of this man Jesus and have little interest in even reading what he taught let alone considering any opposing viewpoints. There's a big difference between talking a good game and updating your facebook status to show you're totally 100% sold out for Jesus, and actually going through with it when you're about to be thrown into jail in North Korea or somewhere. Anyone can say they'd rather die than abandon their faith but when people actually would literally rather die than abandon their faith maybe it's worth considering if they have a point. It certainly shows they believe in it more than life itself.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                      Christian: "According to evolution, all these different and complex species just happened."
                      Biologist: "That is not in any shape or form what evolution describes."
                      Christian: "Well a person who came to my church told me that it is, so I believe that is what evolution is."

                      Christian: "I saw Jesus alive."
                      Pharisee: "Well I went to the trouble of searching through the fifty-day-old bodies in the valley of Gehenna and this one looks like the remains of Jesus."
                      Christian: "Well you must have the wrong body, because I definitely saw Jesus alive. Maybe that's just his earthly body and he now has a new one."

                      The first exchange happens often. It makes the second exchange sound plausible, except for the idea that a pharisee would want to become unclean by handling a corpse.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                        David, I don’t get your point. Some Christians have really bad arguments. So you post some of the worst ones Christians make and........what?

                        Posting the worst arguments that generic Joe Christian makes proves nothing and is a waste of time discussing.

                        If I’m serious about dealing with atheism or any other worldview, I’m not honest with myself if I pick the most feeble arguments from the most feeble proponents. I’m wasting my time and wasting anyone else’s time when I debate the worst arguments.

                        There are many intelligent Christian philosophers and apologists. Why don’t you take up some of their material and discuss that. That would be a good use of your time and our time and would be a good discussion.

                        That’s why I asked earlier what Christians you read.

                        Caution: I’m going to use the word stupid a lot in the sentences ahead. I know this word bothers people. I’m not saying that you are stupid. I’m sure you’re a bright fellow. I’m not naming any individuals as stupid. It’s not a swear word and I will not be discriminating. Every worldview will get tagged with that label. So please everyone, listen to the broad point(s) that I’m making. Mods, edit if you think you need to after reading what I say.

                        There are brilliant Christians and stupid Christians.
                        There are brilliant atheists and stupid atheists.

                        So what?
                        We can post stupid atheist arguments.
                        We can post stupid Muslim arguments.
                        We can post stupid arguments from any worldview.

                        Does that mean all worldviews are false?

                        Of course not. Just because every worldview has proponents that propose stupid arguments doesn’t make the view false.

                        There either is a god or there isn’t a god.
                        If there isn’t a god, then atheism is correct and Christianity, Judaism and Islam are wrong.
                        If there is a god, then Christians, Jews & Muslims are correct and atheists are wrong.

                        Either way way one side is correct and the other wrong. Both can’t be correct and both can’t be wrong.
                        Now if there is a god, further questions need to be asked to see if Christianity or Judaism or Islam have the correct god but those are other questions further down the line.

                        So, why not read some William Lane Craig or J.P. Moreland or Alvin Plantinga.

                        Here’s a list of recommended thinkers. Start interacting with that material if you are serious.

                        Meanwhile, while you hopefully start to interact with good material, let me ask you something.

                        You seem to have issues with Christianity. Why? What?

                        Let’s drop these imaginary feeble discussions and have a real discussion with you. Tell us what it is that bothers you in a sentence.

                        In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

                        Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

                        If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                          Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
                          If you take a typical creationist assertion such as:
                          "Evolutionary theory describes humans as evolving from monkeys."
                          anyone with a basic grasp of how to use the internet can fact check that in less time than it takes to boil a kettle full of water, and discover that it is false, and that the correct assertion is:
                          "Evolutionary theory describes humans and monkeys as evolving from a common ancestor."
                          Actually, it was the proponents of evolution who disseminated the idea that humans evolved from monkeys. When I was growing up, the biology textbooks of grade school and high school contained the picture showing "the ascent of man."

                          The lynchpin of the resurrection argument is that, had Jesus not risen from the dead, anyone could simply have produced his body and Christianity would never have begun.
                          Actually, proof of the resurrection isn't based on an argument. Proof of the resurrection is based on witness testimony as recorded in the New Testament. The same is true of any historical event; proof of an event comes mainly from source documentation.

                          The argument that no one in Jesus' time was able to produce a body would also, necessarily, rely on historical source documentation.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                            This thread is only about a specific piece of Christian apologetic, namely 'the resurrection argument', not about the wider question of whether there is a good argument for Christianity.

                            The argument in question relies on a particular premise which it can be observed not to be on safe ground, because there are demonstrable examples of human behaviour past and present which contradict it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kicking the resurrection argument into a cocked hat.

                              Originally posted by DavidYoung View Post
                              This thread is only about a specific piece of Christian apologetic, namely 'the resurrection argument', not about the wider question of whether there is a good argument for Christianity.

                              The argument in question relies on a particular premise which it can be observed not to be on safe ground, because there are demonstrable examples of human behaviour past and present which contradict it.
                              Would producing the dead body of Jesus have disproved the resurrection?

                              In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

                              Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

                              If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X